PERFECT REALLNFRA ( INDIA) P LTD,KHANDWA vs. ACIT, KHANDWA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 188/IND/2022Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 December 2022AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer should have taken cognizance of the revised computation and allowed the set off of brought forward business loss and depreciation. The Assessing Officer is directed to grant the set off after verification.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed a belated original return and subsequently a revised return. The Assessing Officer passed an order under Section 143(3) and later rejected a rectification application. The CIT(A) upheld the Assessing Officer's order.

What were the issues?

Whether the Assessing Officer was required to consider the revised return for allowing set off of brought forward losses and depreciation. Whether the rejection of the rectification application was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE & SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Shah, CA
For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 06.12.2022Pronounced: 20.12.2022

PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER :

1.

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 30.05.2022 passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the Assessment Year 2014-15.

2.

The grounds of appeal are as under:

“1. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law the National Faceless Appeal Centre erred in confirming the rejection of the revised return of the contention that a belated return cannot be revised. The appellant prays that revised return be accepted and set off of loss be allowed.

2. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law the National Faceless Appeal Centre erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in not allowing set off of loss by not considering the same in the assessment. The appellant prays that the loss be considered and allowed to be set off.

3. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law the National Faceless Appeal Centre erred in confirming the action of AO in not allowing set off of loss as claimed in return of income by not directing the learned AO to rectify the mistake apparent from record. The appellant prays that the Page 2 of 3 rectification to order be directed to be made and set off of loss be allowed. 4. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law the National Faceless Appeal Centre erred in confirming an order which is in contravention to principles of natural justice. The appellant prays that the order be directed to be quashed.”

3.

The original return was filed by the assessee on 30.03.2015 belatedly declaring a total income of Rs.67,59,620/-. The revised return of income was filed on 26.09.2015 declaring total income of Rs.49,52,481/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was passed on 25.11.2016 thereby making disallowance of Rs.26,237/- in respect of electricity expenses, disallowance of Rs.10,000/-, in respect of vehicle expenses, disallowance of Rs.10,000/- in respect of office expenses and disallowance of Rs.20,000/- on account of travelling expenses. The assessee filed rectification application under Section 154 on 06.08.2018 claiming that the adjustment under Section 143(3) of the Act should be revised as per the revised income, assessing the income at Rs.68,25,860/- after various disallowance aggregating to Rs.66,237/-. The order under Section 154 of the Act was passed on 13.05.2019 thereby rejecting the rectification application.

4.

Being aggrieved by the order under section 154 of the Act, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

5.

The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is a Private Limited Company and its books of accounts were audited under Section 44AB of the Act. Due to certain circumstances the original return of income was filed belatedly and, thereafter, the revised return of income was filed within 6 months. The Assessing Officer has not given the set off of brought forward business loss and brought forward depreciation as per the revised computation filed by the assessee. Therefore, the Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer should be directed to take cognisance of the same and accordingly the brought forward business loss & brought forward depreciation should be taken into account by giving the set off of both these heads as per revised computation as per revised computation.

Page 3 of 3 6. The Ld. DR submitted that the Assessing Officer has rightly made disallowance and the CIT(A) has categorically made the finding that there was no infirmity in the rectification order of the Assessing Officer. The Ld. DR relied upon the Assessment Order and the order of the CIT(A).

7.

We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that after filing of the belated return of income and the revised return of income, notices under Section 143(2) of the Act were issued by the Assessing Officer. Thus, the Assessing Officer should have taken cognisance of the revised computation and should have taken the correct income thereby taking cognisance of the brought forward business loss and brought forward depreciation. Therefore, we direct the Assessing Officer to grant set off of brought forward business loss and brought forward depreciation after verifying the same as per the law. Thus, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.

8.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on this 20th December, 2022.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →